I find it truly amusing when religious Christians condemn the secular ways every chance they got but then attribute all the advantages of secularism to Christianity whenever it suits them. They completely forget how extremely savage the Christians were until Europe finally rebelled against the power of the Church and curtailed it to within the confines of an evil sacred book known as the Bible.

Like I said, when I have time my next post will be about how supposedly religious Christians use the Bible to justify their crimes. But I was mainly thinking about the crimes against the others... but thanks to you Chief, you alerted me to add crimes of Christians against other Christians. This'll take me a while.

By the way, Winston. I have raised many points in my posts. The divinity of Jesus and Salvation were only two of them... It wasn't me who insisted on discussing these two points only.... anyway, suit yourself.

I find it truly amusing when religious Christians condemn the secular ways every chance they got but then attribute all the advantages of secularism to Christianity whenever it suits them. They completely forget how extremely savage the Christians were until Europe finally rebelled against the power of the Church and curtailed it to within the confines of an evil sacred book known as the Bible.

This is quite true debunker but two things you need to note:

1) The theocratic power of the Christian Church WAS dismantled (a long time ago now). Why? Does it have anything to do with the fact that Christians acted hypocritcally against Jesus' teachings and thus had no real mandate for their tyranny?

2) This has NOT happened with the Islamic faith. Why? Are it's commands inherently violent and hateful in a prescriptive and persisting way meaning no reform is possible. Perhaps 'those who slay and are slain in making all worship for Allah alone' have a powerful justification within the Islamic texts to constantly wage war against and subjugate unbelievers? Forgive me for posting this point in this thread but it would be very disjointed to break the two up.

debunker wrote:Like I said, when I have time my next post will be about how supposedly religious Christians use the Bible to justify their crimes. But I was mainly thinking about the crimes against the others... but thanks to you Chief, you alerted me to add crimes of Christians against other Christians. This'll take me a while.

If they are supposedly religious ie hypocrites then why waste you time ranting about them? Do you like defending true Christians? Maybe you're secretly an Evangelical like me? Note: That was a joke and not a declaration of faith.

debunker wrote:By the way, Winston. I have raised many points in my posts. The divinity of Jesus and Salvation were only two of them... It wasn't me who insisted on discussing these two points only.... anyway, suit yourself.

1) The theocratic power of the Christian Church WAS dismantled (a long time ago now). Why? Does it have anything to do with the fact that Christians acted hypocritcally against Jesus' teachings and thus had no real mandate for their tyranny?

Actually Christians did act hypocritically against Jesus teachings but that is NOT the reason why the power of the Church was dismantled. The people rebelled against the Bible without even bothering about the true teachings of Jesus. This reform was purely secular. If indeed it was a religious reform, then we wouldn't have seen Europe endorsing its loose moral values (as per Biblical teachings). The whole Bible was simply put aside.

2) This has NOT happened with the Islamic faith. Why? Are it's commands inherently violent and hateful in a prescriptive and persisting way meaning no reform is possible. Perhaps 'those who slay and are slain in making all worship for Allah alone' have a powerful justification within the Islamic texts to constantly wage war against and subjugate unbelievers? Forgive me for posting this point in this thread but it would be very disjointed to break the two up.

First, posting this point in this thread about Muslims is very relevant to the subject at hand because you wanted to make a point by way of comparison which is valid (at least to me). Now, allow me to make another comparison of my own. The Hebrew Bible (perhpas the most violent scripture ever written) didn't prevent the Jews from completely adopting secularism. The Hebrew Bible cannot take credit for secularism in any way, shape or form. Why am I making this comparison? To point out the fact that non of the scriptures (OT, NT or Quran) allow for secularism. Secularism requires the will of the people to revolt against their scriptures. This comparison serves to assert my point that religious Christians cannot take credit for secularism. It was not an option for them as it was not an option for religious Jews and it will not be an option for religious Muslims. Secularism imposes itself on all religions.

If they are supposedly religious ie hypocrites then why waste you time ranting about them? Do you like defending true Christians? Maybe you're secretly an Evangelical like me? Note: That was a joke and not a declaration of faith.

Well, you raise an excellent point. Indeed there's no need to bring evidence as to how hypocitical Christians use Jesus' teachings in vain to justify their violence. But it's Chief who's interested in this. If he simply makes a similar statement like yours then I will not bother to rant about the hypocracy of Christians.

Your style of discussion is very 'Evangelical' on these issues:

Debunker: Gives assertionOthers: Counter assertion with ample Biblical references <--- you mean: others evade the assertions.Debunker: Restate initial assertion <----- only when the counter assertion is simply circular reasoning.Others: Offer further references and analogies to explore other perspectives <----- more of the same circular reasoning.Debunker: Restate initial assertion <---- see above.Others: Yawn <----- I already said it, others could have moved to discuss other points but they got stuck only on two of them using more and more circular reasoning.

debunker wrote:Actually Christians did act hypocritically against Jesus teachings but that is NOT the reason why the power of the Church was dismantled. The people rebelled against the Bible without even bothering about the true teachings of Jesus. This reform was purely secular. If indeed it was a religious reform, then we wouldn't have seen Europe endorsing its loose moral values (as per Biblical teachings). The whole Bible was simply put aside.

If the Christian texts encourage pasifism and a personal relationship with God, whilst 'giving Ceaser his due' then how is this incompatible with Secularism? There is no Christian law which is to applied to non-Christians. Wasn't America founded on those principles by both religious and non-religious people who fled the hypocritical theocracy of the European Churches?

debunker wrote:First, posting this point in this thread about Muslims is very relevant to the subject at hand because you wanted to make a point by way of comparison which is valid (at least to me). Now, allow me to make another comparison of my own. The Hebrew Bible (perhpas the most violent scripture ever written) didn't prevent the Jews from completely adopting secularism. The Hebrew Bible cannot take credit for secularism in any way, shape or form. Why am I making this comparison? To point out the fact that non of the scriptures (OT, NT or Quran) allow for secularism. Secularism requires the will of the people to revolt against their scriptures. This comparison serves to assert my point that religious Christians cannot take credit for secularism. It was not an option for them as it was not an option for religious Jews and it will not be an option for religious Muslims. Secularism imposes itself on all religions.

The reason why the OT didn't prevent the Jews from completely adopting secularism is because the violent passages are descriptive only. There was a period of conquest of the land of Canaan a very long time ago and that was essentially the end of it. By comparison the commands of the Quran are seen as absolute and eternal, Islamic law is to be forced upon non-Muslims by violence if necessary until the entire world is under its rule. The governments of Islamic nations with secular-minded leaders have always struggled (unsuccessfully) against the majority of citizens who simply can't get enough Shariah. The doctrine of continued conquest and subjugation is prevelant in the Islamic texts ONLY. Anyone can see this is being manifested all over the world wherever there is a Muslim population capable of fighting their non-Muslim neighbours.

If the Christian texts encourage pasifism and a personal relationship with God, whilst 'giving Ceaser his due' then how is this incompatible with Secularism? There is no Christian law which is to applied to non-Christians. Wasn't America founded on those principles by both religious and non-religious people who fled the hypocritical theocracy of the European Churches?

Ok, you make almost perfect assertions. You neglected, however, to emphasize that Christianity orders its true followers to not resist secularism or any non-Christian authority. That much is very true. The key thing here is: Don't resist secularism. So again, I reassert my point that if true Christians could peacefully make people adopt true Christian moral conduct (no fornication, etc) then they would have done it. But secularism doesn't care what Christianity thinks about the boyfriend/girlfriend system for example... This to me is a proof that Christianity cannot take credit for secularism. Secularsism was enforced on Christians and true Christians abided by Jesus' teachings and gave Ceasar his due. Please forgive me for repeating myself but my objection was to how Christians take credit for secularism when they only "tolerate" it because Jesus told them to give Ceasar his due.

The reason why the OT didn't prevent the Jews from completely adopting secularism is because the violent passages are descriptive only. There was a period of conquest of the land of Canaan a very long time ago and that was essentially the end of it.

Actually I can list some verses for the truly horrific Jewish version of Islamic conquest outside the Promised Land but I know you won't care for them. Anyway, let's ignore the Jewish conquest (of cities outside the Promised Land) and concentrate on the Jewish Law! Do you think it was descriptive too? Is that why the Jews don't stone people for going to work on Saturday these days? Or is it because they completely ignored their scripture?

debunker wrote:Ok, you make almost perfect assertions. You neglected, however, to emphasize that Christianity orders its true followers to not resist secularism or any non-Christian authority. That much is very true. The key thing here is: Don't resist secularism. So again, I reassert my point that if true Christians could peacefully make people adopt true Christian moral conduct (no fornication, etc) then they would have done it. But secularism doesn't care what Christianity thinks about the boyfriend/girlfriend system for example... This to me is a proof that Christianity cannot take credit for secularism. Secularsism was enforced on Christians and true Christians abided by Jesus' teachings and gave Ceasar his due. Please forgive me for repeating myself but my objection was to how Christians take credit for secularism when they only "tolerate" it because Jesus told them to give Ceasar his due.

Fair point. I'm not trying to give Christianity undue credit for secularism either, i'm just saying that it's teaching are compatible with it whilst Islamic teachings are not. It's the threat to my freedom which concerns me and Islamic conquest is the primary danger for everyone who values their freedom. Islamic conquest is intrinsically and permanently linked with the Quran and Hadith and so will always be a destructive and oppressive force as long as people follow these books.

debunker wrote:

Winston wrote:The reason why the OT didn't prevent the Jews from completely adopting secularism is because the violent passages are descriptive only. There was a period of conquest of the land of Canaan a very long time ago and that was essentially the end of it.

Actually I can list some verses for the truly horrific Jewish version of Islamic conquest outside the Promised Land but I know you won't care for them. Anyway, let's ignore the Jewish conquest (of cities outside the Promised Land) and concentrate on the Jewish Law! Do you think it was descriptive too? Is that why the Jews don't stone people for going to work on Saturday these days? Or is it because they completely ignored their scripture?

You're right I wouldn't really care for them and nor do I care to defend those assertions you just made simply because (as you have said before) the Jews do not really follow the OT anymore. If there are indeed verses of conquest or violence which are to be followed for all time in the OT they are being (and have been) ignored for a very long time. Sadly, the same can not be said for the Islamic texts and people are suffering as a result.

Actually right now, dear Winston, the only conquest going on is American conquest... and that's why countries in "Old Europe" (France and Germany) objected to this.

Let me predict the future for you dear Winston. The whole world will make the Middle East its battle ground not because of the "Islamic danger" but because of the "Islamic oil fields".

So please stop playing the role of the victim when the leader of the civilized world is very much in the act of ravaging the Middle East (starting with Iraq). 65 % of the world's oil reserves is in the Persian Gulf! No wonder the Americans were so concerned about the Freedom of Iraqis!

Actually right now, dear Winston, the only conquest going on is American conquest... and that's why countries in "Old Europe" (France and Germany) objected to this.

Let me predict the future for you dear Winston. The whole world will make the Middle East its battle ground not because of the "Islamic danger" but because of the "Islamic oil fields".

So please stop playing the role of the victim when the leader of the civilized world is very much in the act of ravaging the Middle East (starting with Iraq). 65 % of the world's oil reserves is in the Persian Gulf! No wonder the Americans were so concerned about the Freedom of Iraqis!

Truly is really amazing I never knew all of those names about the Islamis terrorist movements. I do believe there are so many groups linked to one group or another. Thanks for your info

Jomo Kenyatta, President of Kenya “When the Missionaries arrived, the Africans had the land and the Missionaries had the Bible. They taught how to pray with our eyes closed.When we opened them, they had the land and we had the Bible.”

You could be right about the Wests true interests in the Middle East. If you are, then we in the West are bigger fools than those who think the world will be at peace when Islam dominates it.

Winston, you are WONDERFUL!

BTW, I know you are agnostic, but you seem to care about the Bible. Therefore, for you only, I'll stop criticizing the Bible. I will never criticize it ever again.

Hell no debunker, have at the Bible as much you want! If I ever really get round to studying the Bible properly i'll want as much ammunition against it as I can find for balance...and you provide lots.